THE CONTENDERBritain’s only quality Contender paper July 2000MIDSUMMER SPECIAL ISSUE No 583

MITCHELL IN ISAFSLEAZESHOCK!

ISAF STEP IN AS RUMOURS OFSKULDUGGERY PERSIST AFTER

OXFORD MEETING

INSIDE2 WHO’S WHO IN THE

ASSOCIATION4 HOW RICH ARE WE?

The BCA 1999 Accounts4 ISAF SINGLEHANDER

OLYMPIC TRIALSChris Mitchell reports from Quiberon

6 E-MAIL FORUMNew regular column bringing you thelatest views from around the world

12 ...& MORE E-MAIL...Contendering Tips

13 REPORTS & RESULTS16 REMAINING FIXTURES17 TRAVELLERS TROPHY -

CURRENT STANDINGS18 BOATS & GEAR FOR

SALE

“IT COULDONLY HAVE

BEENDELIBERATE,AFTER ALL

WHO COULDGET IT SOWRONG”

only £49.95MOUTMOUTMOUTMOUTMOUTON DEVELOPMENTS ON DEVELOPMENTS ON DEVELOPMENTS ON DEVELOPMENTS ON DEVELOPMENTS TTTTTel:el:el:el:el: 01628 52940 01628 52940 01628 52940 01628 52940 01628 52940

Chris Mitchell, theChairman of theI n t e r n a t i o n a lC o n t e n d e rAssocation to bei n v e s t i g a t e d .ISAF officialsconfirmed todaythat veteran sailorChris Mitchell wll bei n v e s t i g a t e dfollowing hisperformance in therecent Oxford openm e e t i n g .S u s p i c i o nsurrounded Mitchellafter other

c o m p e t i t o r sconfirmed therumour that he wasseen talking to ashady looking Asian

businessman shortlybefore the second

race, which hemanaged to lose ine x t r a o r d i n a r ystyle. Mitchell hada substantial lead inbright sunshine andwhat was no morethan a pleasantbreeze when hecapsized during anappalling gybe. Commented onecompetitor “Ialways thought hischaracter underpressure wassuspect, but thisgybe was so badthat it can’t havebeen mere ranki n c o m p e t e n c e ” Another bystandersaid “It was ashocker of a gybe”and “it could onlyhave beendeliberate, after all,who could get it sow r o n g ” .Mitchell denied allwrong doing sayingthat he had onlygiven a forecast,four going on five, ifa little patchy. Thiswas suspiciouslydifferent to the oneobtained by TimHolden of glassyc a l m .Meeting winnerJones, still

shrugging off theattentions of theFarmoor frolickingfemales 12 hoursafter stridingashore, is reportedto be exhausted. Nos u s p i c i o nsurrounded him, “Iwas too far away tosee andconcentrating onpulling my ownrope” he saidd i p l o m a t i c a l l y,however, ISAFinvestigators maywish to questionhim as well after hew a suncharacteristicallyobserved liberallywaving cash aroundin the vicinity of thebar. Head of theISAF disciplinarycommittee Ivor

Knoeidea stated: “inthe light of recentevents in cricket wewant to ensure thatsailing is keptsqueaky clean”. Hecontinued: “it iscrucial for thewellbeing of thesport that anysuggestions of this

Chris Mitchell in action - Vertical this time Photo: Turtle

type of irregularityare fullywhitewashed, sorry,I mean investigated,and those foundguilty heavilypunished by way ofbuying more beersa l l r o u n d . ”(Source: Reuters)

WAVELENGTH ON THE MOVEGraham Scott and WavelengthDesigns have relocated to Cornwall,and can now be found at:

... Travelling to Medemblik? Contact RB Sport & Travel for the best ferry deals ...

Wavelength Designs,Unit 5a, TheStamps Ind Est, Rising Sun,

Callington, Cornwall, PL17 8JETel/fax 01579 351628,

E-mail: gscott@wavelengthdesigns.com

Website:www.wavelengthdesigns.com

ContenderingMagazine of the British Contender Association

SEND ANY ARTICLES, REPORTS, PICTURES &ADVERTISEMENTS TO JERRY DRISCOLL AT:

1 Springfields • Lower Moors RoadColden Common • Winchester • SO21 1SH

Tel/Fax: 01962 711698E-Mail: contendering@driscoll.globalnet.co.uk

Text on disk is greatly preferred, I recommend saving as a text file(unformatted), although I can import most word processor formats.

If you want pictures back, please put a label on the back: write in felttip. Ballpoint impressions can show through when they’re scanned.

CLASS OFFICIALSChairmanChairmanChairmanChairmanChairman Stuart Jones, 40 Stevenson Drive, Binfield, Berks, RG42 5JB

Tel: 01344 301286 01344 301286 01344 301286 01344 301286 01344 301286SSSSSecrecrecrecrecretaretaretaretaretaryyyyy David Davies, The Old Post Office, Hollybush, Ledbury,

HR8 1ET Tel: 015 3163 2308015 3163 2308015 3163 2308015 3163 2308015 3163 2308TTTTTrrrrreasureasureasureasureasurererererer Charlie Baynes, 21 Quorn Gardens, Leigh-on-Sea, Essex,

SS9 2TA Tel: 017 0255 8658017 0255 8658017 0255 8658017 0255 8658017 0255 8658FFFFFixixixixixturturturturtureseseseses Tim Holden, 34 The Ghyll, Fixby, Huddersfield, HD2 2FE

Tel: 01484 32094001484 32094001484 32094001484 32094001484 320940NNNNNeeeeewslettwslettwslettwslettwslettererererer Jerry Driscoll, 1 Springfields, Lower Moors Road, Colden Common,

Winchester, Hants, SO21 1SH Tel: 019 6271 1698019 6271 1698019 6271 1698019 6271 1698019 6271 1698TTTTTechnicechnicechnicechnicechnicalalalalal Nigel Walbank, 1 Southern Road, Lymington, Hampshire

Tel: 015 9067 7166015 9067 7166015 9067 7166015 9067 7166015 9067 7166WWWWWeb Seb Seb Seb Seb Sitititititeeeee Jerry Driscoll, 1 Springfields, Lower Moors Road, Colden Common,

Winchester, Hants, SO21 1SH Tel: 019 6271 1698019 6271 1698019 6271 1698019 6271 1698019 6271 1698

FULL MEASURERSD. Chivers The Rowans, 6 Fishbourne Rd, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 3HU

Tel: 012 4378 2958012 4378 2958012 4378 2958012 4378 2958012 4378 2958Ron Duffield 13 Hollow Lane, Hayling Island, Hants, PO11 9AA Tel: 017 0546 4996017 0546 4996017 0546 4996017 0546 4996017 0546 4996Don O’Donnell Edelweiss, 58 Station Road, Wootton Bassett, Wilts Tel: 017 9385 2245017 9385 2245017 9385 2245017 9385 2245017 9385 2245

MAINTENANCE MEASURERSDave Aston Ryburn, 3 Warbler Close, Trowbridge, Wilts, BA14 9TY Tel: 012 2577 6980012 2577 6980012 2577 6980012 2577 6980012 2577 6980V. Provoost Tornton Lodge, 3 Crofton Way, Warsash, Hants, SO31 9FQ

Tel: 014 8957 9207014 8957 9207014 8957 9207014 8957 9207014 8957 9207Rodger White 10 Willoughby Road, Harpenden, Herts. Al5 4PF Tel: 015 8276 1288015 8276 1288015 8276 1288015 8276 1288015 8276 1288

REGIONAL FLEET CONTACTSCORNWALLPorthpean Stacey Bray, 34 Victoria Rd, St. Austell, Cornwall, PL25 4QD

Tel: 01726 7785901726 7785901726 7785901726 7785901726 77859DORSETHighcliffe Stephen Waite, 10 Asquith Close, Purewell, Christchurch

Tel: 012 0248 1980012 0248 1980012 0248 1980012 0248 1980012 0248 1980Poole Y.C Richard Smart, 56 Roman Rd, Broadstone, BH18 9DN Tel: 012 0260 0837012 0260 0837012 0260 0837012 0260 0837012 0260 0837ESSEXLeigh-on-Sea Charlie Baynes, 21 Quorn Gardens, Leigh-on-Sea, Essex, SS9 2TA

Tel: 017 0255 8658017 0255 8658017 0255 8658017 0255 8658017 0255 8658Brightlingsea Dave Bridle, 7 Mareness Crescent, Brightlingsea Tel: 012 0630 5677012 0630 5677012 0630 5677012 0630 5677012 0630 5677Maylandsea Bay Dave Griffiths, Marsh Cottage, The Esplanade, West Mayland,

Chelmsford, CM3 6AL Tel: 016 2174 1480016 2174 1480016 2174 1480016 2174 1480016 2174 1480HAMPSHIRELymington Nigel Walbank, 1 Southern Road, Lymington, Hants Tel: 015 9067 7166015 9067 7166015 9067 7166015 9067 7166015 9067 7166Weston Graham Scott, Wavelength Designs, Unit 10, Mitchell Point,

Hamble, Southampton Tel: 023 8045 7417023 8045 7417023 8045 7417023 8045 7417023 8045 7417KENTBroadstairs Pete Giffin, 12 Rosemary Gardens, Broadstairs, Kent Tel: 018 4360 2356018 4360 2356018 4360 2356018 4360 2356018 4360 2356LEICESTERSHIRERutland Richard Gimmler, 10 Gotham Lane, Bunny, NG11 6QJ Tel: 011 5921 4771011 5921 4771011 5921 4771011 5921 4771011 5921 4771LONDONDatchet Water Stuart Jones, 5 Fern Cottages, Fern Lane, Little Marlow,

Bucks Tel: 016 2852 9408016 2852 9408016 2852 9408016 2852 9408016 2852 9408King George Mike Keates, 193 Church Rd, Leyton, London, E10 7BQ Tel: 020 8556 6372020 8556 6372020 8556 6372020 8556 6372020 8556 6372NORTHERNDovestone Cris Miles, 16 Brownhill Lane, Uppermill, Oldham, OL3 6BZ

Tel: 014 5782 0432014 5782 0432014 5782 0432014 5782 0432014 5782 0432Grimwith Sandy Clapham, 61 Holt Park Crescent, Leeds, LS16 7SL

Tel: 011 32 61 0131011 32 61 0131011 32 61 0131011 32 61 0131011 32 61 0131SCOTLAND

Stewart Murdoch, 6 Balmyle Rd, West Ferry, Dundee, DD5 1JJTel: 013 8247 7133013 8247 7133013 8247 7133013 8247 7133013 8247 7133

SOUTH WESTChew Valley Dave Aston, Ryburn, 3 Warbler Close, Trowbridge, BA14 9TY

Tel: 01225 77698001225 77698001225 77698001225 77698001225 776980SUSSEXBough Beech Peter Dives, 18 Overton Shaw, East Grinstead, RH19 2HN

Tel: 01342 32826701342 32826701342 32826701342 32826701342 328267Eastbourne Dave Pike, 5 Fitzmaurice Avenue, Eastbourne Tel: 01323 64224201323 64224201323 64224201323 64224201323 642242Lancing Tony White, The Cokers, Borstal Rd, Steyning, BN44 3PD Tel: 01903 81600701903 81600701903 81600701903 81600701903 816007Worthing Dave Skarden, Silver Birches, Fryan Rd, Storrington, West Sussex

Tel: 01903 743538 01903 743538 01903 743538 01903 743538 01903 743538WALESBritish Steel John Pym, 5 Selby Close, Llanfrechfa, Cwmbran, NP4 4 8TT

Tel: 01633 87189701633 87189701633 87189701633 87189701633 871897WARWICKSHIREDraycote Water Amar Marphatia, 20 Broadbent Close, Whetstone Tel: 01533 86409901533 86409901533 86409901533 86409901533 864099

EDITOR’S BIT

Front Cover Picture: ICA Chairman Chris Mitchell at Pwhelli. Photo byTurtle, 01758 713641.

CHAIRMAN’S CHAT

Once again I find myselfapologising for the fact thatContendering is just a touchlater than planned. I think,however, that I have a betterexcuse than usual – therather ear l ier thananticipated arrival of a babyboy, William, interruptedthe production process just

at wrong moment. I had been rather sceptical ofeveryone else’s tales of how time consuming suchwriggly little blobs can be, but I am now starting tounderstand a little better…

This issue has all the normal snippets of news andreports, plus details of the forthcoming worlds atMedemblik. For those that haven’t been there before,it is well worth the trip – a delightful little place withexcellent facilities, and a reputation (experienced firsthand by myself and many others in the fleet) for topquality organisation and fun. Don’t miss it!

This issue marks the introduction of a new feature inContendering: the e-mail forum. Over the last few issueswe’ve probably bored everyone by banging on aboutchecking out the Contender web site etc. Some of youare probably convinced we’re a bunch of techie nerdsin green anoraks and thick glasses rather than roughtough sailing types (now Nick Rawlings has left the classwe can deny it!). We ARE aware that not every one has(or wants) access to the internet, but equally we areaware that there are a lot of issues raised by Contendersailors around the world which are relevant to all BCAmembers. The e-mail forum has provided a mediumfor these ideas to be expressed, and I anticipate the“highlights” of these discussions will become a regularfeature in Contendering.

Scotland in May. Well I canvouch for you, thatsometimes it’s quite warm,though sometimes it’s morelike the depths of Winter. Agreat mistake was onlytaking my soft pondySoutherners Summerwetsuit. However, it wouldhave been the biggestmistake not to turn up, as I,

for one, thought that it was one of the most enjoyableNationals that I have attended. A very friendly club,

Contendering - July 2000 3great racing, even if the wind was a touch wildlyvarying, some great socials and fine scenary. A lot ofthanks should go out to Ian, Stewart and Gavin andothers of the Scottish fleet that organised the event,along with all at East Lothian YC. A great effort. It waswell rounded off with Gavins rendition on the pipes aswe were lauching on the last day. The fleet had a whipround so he can get rid of that bum high note.

For those that didn’t attend you needn’t be disappointedat missing the AGM as we didn’t manage to fit it in,with the tight social schedule and all. So we’ll have itat Rutland. That should boost the attendance thereperhaps? There are things to discuss at present,particularly the subject of hull weight reduction, again,and the possibility of carbon booms. All this was reallyspawned by the recent ISAF singlehanded trials. Nodoubt these things will be kicked around at the WorldsAGM so we’ll know more then. At present this is all justopen for discussion so watch this space.

Talking of communications, the various web sites andthe contender mailing list is a great way to keep abreastof news and discussions going on in the class. TheInternational Website is now at www.sailingsource.com/contender. This has plenty of content of its own andlinks to all the national sites. The British site beingwww.sailingsource.com/contender/gbr. Also from theInternational site you can join the Contender mailinglist. This is used as a general discussion group, technicaltips and news forum. Really anything you want fromappealing for a cheap secondhand sail to advertisingan event etc. The mails go out to everyone in the Worldthat has registered with the service and is usually nomore than half a dozen emails a day, so you won’t getswamped. Go and have a look, join up and add yourown comments. Then you’ll know all about the AussieNationals in time to enter.

Enough from me. I’ll just end with a cautionary tale ofmy trip home from Scotland. Being cultured, I thoughtI would stop off and see Holy Isle, Lindisfarne Prioryand all that as I haven’t been to the North East before.It’s approached by a tidal causeway, which had no waterin sight as I drove across. With a devil may care attitude,having made no sense of the tide chart in the car park(a little worrying having just come third in the Nationals),I set off for the sights. Plenty of other people around,must be a while before I have to go. Mmmm... Youguessed it, after an hour or so of sightseeing, I got backin my car to find a couple of feet of damp stuff over theroad out!! Wally. Not to worry, there was a pub and Ihad a good book. Just as well, as five hours later I gotoff the island, only to sit in the Newcastle evening rushhour. Still, well worth the visit. See you all around soonbarring other mishaps.

Stuart Jones

SECRETARY’S SCRIBBLEI really do like a nationalchampionships in Scotland,in fact Stuart and I were onlysaying that we should do itevery year. Firstly , we don’thave to do anything,secondly, they real ly domake a good job of it. Theentertainment was brilliant,

and the venue just typically Scottish (Rhona has justsaid - what exactly do you mean by that!). Well, lovelysandy beach, great entertainment, winds light andvariable!

Stuart Jones and Chris Mitchell stayed in a twin room inthe same B & B as Rhona and I. Most of the time theybehaved themselves although the lady owner gotslightly confused by our conversations at breakfast time.

Me “Chairman Mitchell, can you pass the Tea”

Chris “Yes Secretary Davies”

Chris “How’s Chairman Jones this Morning”

Stu (PHaaart) “Fine thanks”

etc etc.

I think she must have thought we were communists.Rhona took all this childish talk in her stride and treatedus like her 16 year old first year sixth dance students (orso Chris hoped!)

Talking of Chris his mother must be a real battle-axe, ordo we have more evidence of this man making hugesums of money from race fixing? On the last day of thenationals he was toying with the idea of staying for theobligatory last night curry and beer. However, hementioned vaguely at breakfast that he had to dig hismothers garden so he may go that night. He finishedsailing early and made the most monumental dash forit, forgetting his pyjama trousers! and his underarm role-on! He also left £120 at the B & B. Now I have sinceheard that he “threw a race” at the recent Oxford openmeeting with what can only be described as the kindof gybe even he couldn’t have done accidentally. Wehave all heard about the ISAF investigations into racerigging at Oxford. So I have decided to make publicthe circumstantial evidence that he actually left thenationals early to meet a German named Hinze (ringleader of a huge European betting syndicate) atNewcast le Docks for throwing the nat ionalchampionships. Look, just think about it, he could havewon several races if he hadn’t sailed really badly!

The class membership numbers are still holding upreasonably but I am concerned that we are slowly losingmembers. In the light of the turn out to Rutland lastyear (What a first class event that was!) and the nationalsthis year we should be holding numbers steady ataround 170. So if you have any club friends who havestill not joined then Roger White will only be too gladto take a cheque off you.

So, on to the worlds, I hope the Brits are going to swellthe numbers. From what I can gather we should havea good representation. The training program in the runup looks good with Porthpean, Felpham and Lymingtonfor us down South, thanks to our resident banker Wim,sorry Tim.

Finally I would like to appeal to any budding classsecretaries out there. I’ve probably done my time andwould like to hand on to a new keen person to re-invigorate the post. I would like to resign at next years(2001) AGM at the latest. Please come and talk to me ifyou would like to have a go. [Ed: this sounds like agood way to end up the lonely old git at the bar.]

See you on the water.

David Davies

Contendering - July 20004

noitaicossArednetnoChsitirB

raeyehtroftnuoccAerutidnepxEdnaemocnI9991rebmeceDts13dednE

9991 8991£ £

EMOCNIsnoitpircsbuspihsrebmeM 031,2 827,2

deviecertseretnI 52 681

gnihtolcrehtodnastrihstaewSemocni

84 52

emocnIlatoT 302,2 939,2

ERUTIDNEPXEnoitpircsbusACI 865 617

noitpircsbusAYR 75 75

rehtodnaegatsops'yraterceSsesnepxe

55 862

stsocnoitartsinimdarehtO - -

gnisitrevdafotenrettelsweNemocni

466,1 471,2

:noitomorpssalC

taobliaS 285 452

srekcitsraC 283 -

gnithcaYdnasthcaY 433 843

ticifed/)sulprus(pihsnoipmahC 552- 413

sezirpdnaseihporT 83 231

erutidnepxElatoT 424,3 362,4

raeyehtrofticifeD )122,1£( )423,1£(

CommentarCommentarCommentarCommentarCommentary on Accounts for the year endedy on Accounts for the year endedy on Accounts for the year endedy on Accounts for the year endedy on Accounts for the year ended31 December 199931 December 199931 December 199931 December 199931 December 1999

The BCA posted a further deficit for the year ended 31December 1999 of £1,221 following on from that posted forthe previous year of £1,324, mainly as a result of a continuingfall in numbers subscribing to the Association together withcontinuing investment in our class promotional activitiesincluding the excellent Newsletter and Sailboat stand.

Whilst we have gone some way to address the issue byincreasing subscription rates for year 2000 we are needingto be careful with our expenditure levels to conserve our cashreserves. Certainly we need to avoid making deficits in futureperiods and reduce the reliance of the ICA on BCA fundingwho owe us £994 as at 31 December 1999.

Charlie Baynes - BCA Treasurer

BCA ACCOUNTS - 19999991rebmeceDts13tasateehSecnalaB

9991 8991£ £

)ACI(srotbeD 459 154

srotbedrehtO 04 -

knabtahsaC 473,2 674,3

stessAtnerruC 863,3 729,3

niemocnidnasnoitpircsbuSecnavda

0 )41(

srotidercyrdnuS )037( )45(

stessAteN 836,2£ 958,3£

tasulprusdetalumuccA9991yraunaJts1

958,3 381,5

raeyehtrofticifeD )122,1( )423,1(

tasulprusdetalumuccA9991rebmeceDts13

836,2£ 958,3£

After a bit of manoeuvring Graham Scott and I wentoff to the ISAF cat and single hander trials at Quiberonin April. The information we were getting from ISAFabout the format and intent of the trials was nonetoo helpful, but our sense of things was that it wouldbe a good thing to be present, even if the class hasno interest in having Olympic status. In the event, Ithink our appearance was very worthwhile and wascertainly much appreciated by the organisers.

The sailing at Quiberon was run from the EcoleNational du Voile centre situated on the inshore sideof a long north-south running peninsula on theBrittany coast, and a very impressive place it was too.I don’t know of anywhere in the UK that could matchthe facilities. There were large changing rooms,

excellent showers, a large accommodation block,dining room, bar, and a large hangar-like place forstorage, working on boats and so on. The slipwayran down onto a beach where launching would bepretty straightforward in almost any wind direction.Once on the water it was a short sail to the opensea, but with alternative sailing areas sheltered behindthe peninsula. About the only complaint one couldhave was that the slipway was a bit steep for pullinga Contender up after a hard sail.

The event was held over 4 days. Full details of theboats are on the ISAF web pages, but briefly, the boatspresent were the Musto (Devoti) skiff, Nautivela skiff,RS 600 with and without gennaker, Vortex, Laser EPSand Contender. The International Canoe, Moth and

ISAF OLYMPIC SINGLEHANDER TRIALSISAF OLYMPIC SINGLEHANDER TRIALSChris Mitchell attended the ISAF trials at Quiberon in France for the potential successor to the Finn for theOlympic Games. He reports on the event and offers some thoughts on the implications for future technical

development of the Contender class...

Contendering - July 2000 5

Advertisement

Finn were all conspicuous by their absence. TheMonday was spent discussing and sorting out thetesting arrangements. Tuesday was given over totesting and a race in a dying wind, which was prettyinconclusive. Wednesday was again testing and therewere two races in a force 3-4. As expected, the skiffswon, but were not out of sight. The Vortex was goingabout the same speed as us, while the poor old LaserEPS dragged round at the back. Apart from Grahamand me other Contender sailors present includedAndrea Bonezzi, Jan von der Bank and Gabriel Wicke.In true Contender style, we even managed to have ageneral recall in the second race.

The French organizers ran a smart operation on andoff the water, and had done a good job of ensuringthe testers got into all the boats and reported theircomments back. However, it was less than clear justexactly what it was that ISAF wanted. Graham and Ialso felt critical of the standard of the testers. Somewere excellent, but some were poor club standard.Naively, perhaps, I had imagined that the testerswould be of the ilk of Iain Percy and Shirley Robertson– experienced and very high standard single-handedsailors. Graham had to endure watching his boatbeing inverted and the tester strolling around on thebottom of it. I didn’t let anyone near mine! However,virtually all the testers sailed Graham’s boat at somestage and I am very grateful to him for being soenthusiastically generous.

The Thursday was rainy and windless. Graham andI spent about 30 minutes presenting the ICA case ofnot wanting to be Olympic, but anxious to retain

international status [the policy as agreed at the ICAAGM at Kiel] to Cliff Norbury and Simon Forbes, theISAF members. As the sailing was finished we thenpacked up and headed off on the four-hour driveback to Caen to get the ferry, rushing through asupermarket on route to stock up on wine.

I was left with the impression that the ISAF is not quitesure what to do about the Finn or its replacement,but is very aware that the Finn has an extremelystrong lobby. As so much of ISAF funding comes fromTV coverage of the Olympics they are anxious toincrease the amount of time sailing gets on TV andso are quite keen on televisually appealing, crash andburn boats like the 49er. I’m not sure it’s really whatsailing needs and I think there is a very goodargument that the Finn is the ultimate Olympic boat.I know you need to be a gorilla to sail one, but theydon’t have a special 100 metre sprint for athletes withshort legs, or shot-putting for anorexics, so I don’tsee why sailing has to be a special case for some sortof bodily equality.

There were a few points about the Contender that Ithink the class would do well to consider. There isno doubt that the boat is a classic design. We couldhave put racks and a genniker on one, but as Grahamsaid, it would have been so undignified. However,there was a sense that the boat was dated and thatthere were some things that could be done to providesome evidence of continued progress.

Foremost among these things was the fact only theVortex and the Contender had alloy spars. Everyone

RONDARRACEBOATS LTD

CONSISTENTLY QUICK CONTENDERS

1st, 2nd 1996 WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP

2nd 1996 BRITISH NATIONALS

2nd, 4th 1995 WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP

1st, 2nd, 3rd 1995 BRITISH NATIONALS

1st, 2nd1st, 2nd 1996 WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP1996 WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP

2nd 1996 BRITISH NA1996 BRITISH NATIONALS

2nd, 4th2nd, 4th 1995 WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP1995 WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP

1st, 2nd, 3rd1st, 2nd, 3rd 1995 BRITISH NA1995 BRITISH NATIONALS

New for 2000!

The World Championship winning Rondar Contender is now built using Vinylester resins, with Epoxy used for bonding in critical areas.

There is a new, more sophisticated glass reinforcement, and the internal framing has been revised for greater strength.

There is now a moulded recess for the Silva 103P Compass, and Pro-Grip non-slip is standard on the gunwhales.

Complete boat,

fully fitted with

Wavelength Rig

and ready to race

£5495inc VAT

Contact Paul Young at Rondar Raceboats Ltd, Unit 14, Indus Acre, Avro Way, Bowerhill, Melksham, SN12 6TP. Tel: 01225 707550, Fax: 01225 702113, e-mail: Rondar@compuserve.com, Website: www.rondarboats.com

Contendering - July 20006else was using carbon. As everyone knows, boomsare very vulnerable. We ought to investigate the useof carbon booms, possibly coupled with a change inthe scantling. If we move to carbon, we also shouldtake on loose-footed sails. Not everyone knows,though, that alloy tubes used for the masts are gettingharder to find and the price is going up. Apparentlythe alloy is an aerospace product, and that industryis switching to ….. carbon. We ought to move tocarbon masts as well. In the end they will probablybe not much more expensive than what an alloy mastis going to cost in the future. At the same time it willallow us to consider a reduction in the spar weight,and would rekindle sail/spar development. I believeit will also give the boat a more up-to-date image.

While we are on the subject of rule changes, we reallyought to change the foil shapes and get rid of thoseridiculous tips that always get broken off. The foilscould be more efficiently shaped, less damage-prone,and quite possibly a bit lighter. We could also ensurethat the rules were clearly written, so that there are

Chris’s views about change may not be shared by the class as a whole, indeed, as he mentions, the ICA membership has generallyadopted a highly conservative approach to change in the past. Additionally, the open discussions at the BCA AGM at Looe last yearindicated a substantial resistance to change in the UK fleet. From an editorial point of view it would be nice to have a simplecounter argument to set against Chris’s comments, but the debate seems a little more complex than that of “should we - shouldn’twe” change, so this seems a good point to introduce our new E-Mail forum: Chairman of the Dutch Contender Association, Evert Benvan Veen, started the ball rolling when he threw his opinions out into cyberspace, and a number of people around the worldseemed to have a few (!) things to say about his suggestions....

But before going on there is a little postscript to add to the ISAF trials from Bernard Bonte in Belgium:

“Interesting report on the ISAF trials for the new Olympic single handers for the games in 2008 in a French sailing magazine “Voileset Voiliers”. The Contender was second in total amount of points 45.5/50. First was the MUSTO with 46/50 points. So maybe theContender will be Olympic! The points given in the article on the ISAF trials in Quiberon are not the official points given by ISAF, butthose given by a group of young sailers who had the opportunity to sail all these boats. These young sailors were: Eric d’Hooghe,Valerian Lebrun, Frederic Moreau, Vincent Joyeux, with good experience in Laser, 470 or 49er. The other tested boats were: Vis with45 points, Laser Vortex with 35 points, Laser EPS with 43 points, RS 600 with 43 points. The Vortex was considered as a family boatand came in the last position.

E-MAIL FORUM...The Contender e-mail forum acts as a sounding board and a generalchat medium allowing individual members to air their ideas and makesuggestions to a much wider audience than the average AGM. Ithink it is important that I point out that it is the electronic equivalentof a beer and a gossip at the bar, and the views expressed here arethe personal views of the individuals concerned and not necessarilythe official views of the ICA or individual national associations, evenwhere the individual is an officer of the association.Having said that, many of the issues discussed are highly relevant tothe class and worthy of reproducing here so that those without accessto the internet and the e-mail list can get an idea of some of thethoughts being tossed around by various Contender sailors aroundthe world. If you do have access to the internet, it is worth consideringregistering with the e-mail forum: the average is probably only one ortwo messages a day, and some of the debates can be quite amusing.Trying to edit the last six month’s messages has been quite difficult(the initial compilation ran to 22 pages!): there tends to be a “thread”running through each debate, but very often a side debate spins offat a tangent from this, so I have had to be quite ruthless about pruningtopics leading away from the main subject. This explains some ofthe odd unconnected references which occasionally occur as a result,and I apologise to anyone who feels that their message has beenunfairly hacked, but tough, that’s the editor’s job!

no arguments about maximum and minimum size.

A much more difficult issue is the hull weight. TheContender was by far the heaviest single hander atthe trials, and Graham and I had to help each otherup the (rather steep) slipway. Weight reduction hasbeen addressed before, and the ICA membershipalways rejects i t , but I think i t needs to bereconsidered. Most boats have a few kilos ofcorrectors on, so losing 2-3 kilos right away shouldbe no problem. Subsequent reductions could bephased in over a few years. Losing 10 –15 kg off theall up weight of 104 kilos should not be too difficult.It would make the boat a little faster, but the maingain would be handling it on a trolley.

These issues will all be discussed at the ICA meetingin Medemblik, and I hope that, at the very least, thecarbon spars and loose-footed sails go out to a postalballot, and are subsequently approved.

Chris Mitchell - ICA Chairman

As Chris Mitchell has provided a report on the ISAF Olympic classtrials at Quiberon, I have cut out the very considerable body of thatdebate, and similarly I have ignored the Pro/Anti Olympic argument,as in reality it is not an issue the class is likely to have to address forthe moment.With those two issues eliminated, the principal discourse has involvedthe technical development of the class & possible rule changes, sohere we go...15th March: Evert-Ben van Veen, NetherlandsI guess that the present position of the ICA board is a consequenceof the general conservatism of the ICA in general consideringdevelopments in dinghy racing around us. Some years ago I read anarticle in the German newsletter proposing some small changes inthe class rules and warning that if we wouldn’t do anything about itthe Contender would get outdated. A Dutch historian has once calledthis phenomenon ‘the law of the retarding advantage’. And it happens.We had to adjust our slogan from ‘the fastest singlehander’ to the‘most popular singlehander trapeze boat’ . In the near future wemight have to change that to ‘the most funny’ or whatever. [ed: Thisslogan was introduced in the UK. The rationale behind the change wasthat the new slogan is intended to combat the image of class strength beingbuilt around the RS600 by LDC. It was felt that in the UK, where there areprobably as many actively sailed Contenders as RS600, the message ofthe international and domestic strength of the Contender class neededreinforcing. The change was not related to comparative performance.]

Contendering - July 2000 7Nearly everybody sails with some kilos lead in his boat, yet the classrules were not adapted - of course with a considerable ‘grace period’- to lower the total weight of our boats. A Dutch centreboard/rudderbuilder told me that he finds it difficult to build these things not underthe minimum weight. Changes to the sail have been proposed whichcould make the Contender faster or better manageable, same result.When I attended the GBR nationals last year a paper was distributedabout promoting the class. Off meeting it was called ‘rambling’. Notbeing from there I might not have missed the specific Oxbridge clauseswhich only could make it acceptable to some, but as a lawyer I knowwhen a paper is rambling or not. It was not. It just held someunpleasant messages, which is an entirely different thing.To my opinion the class should seriously look at itself and find waysto regain the image of an innovative yet affordable sailing machine. If after Quiberon an extreme floatable flying device, like this Devotithing or the Nautivela where Andrea talked about, would win, theContender might sti l l have a chance if adapts to the newcircumstances. If a less extreme boat wins, the Contender is probablylost, having missed the change to be on par some years ago. In thescenario of the extreme ‘boat’ the Contender can be the affordablealternative and even the breeding ground for all those are not (yet)the few professionals running for the Olympics. ..//..16th March: Mike Beggs, UK.Evert-Ben, Sorry you are confusing popular classes with Olympicclasses. In U.K. no-one sails Olympic Classes. They are a fewboats of extremely expensive specification which become obsoleteat least once every 4 years. Their sailors are only interested inpersonal fame and will trample on anyone to get it.The Contender, luckily, is the very opposite of these, i.e. there aremany, cheap boats where even older boats can compete. AndContender sailors are all sociable, helpful and friendly people. Longmay it remain so.Also, if the ISAF and IOC had any intention of choosing the Contenderas an Olympic Class why have they not done so in the 31 years sincethe Contender won the last Olympic Single-hander Trials???17th March: Evert-Ben van Veen, Netherlands.Thank you for your replies. To rebut one remark. I spent about 4-5hours a week for the Dutch CA (writing nasty letters on the net notincluded), so one cannot say that I just complain about others. ..//..In the Netherlands we had a good season compared to Dutchstandards and we will see a few new faces. I do not know whetherthat is because of our efforts but of course tend to think that to someextent it is. The boat was not changed so it can also be done withoutmodifications but I know we have also lost a few potential sailors tomore modern designs. As an already existing class you have theadvantage of a second hand market and once lured into the class wetry to keep them here, that their next boat might be a new Contender,adding to the second hand market, etc. Putting great efforts in yournew sailors, a personal coach system, hanging to the telephone forages trying to make them come to meetings, helping them as muchas possible. Like when you have finished (even I finish before thenewcomers most of the time) sailing behind those who are stillstruggling with that damned thing and giving directions instead ofgetting a beer. It certainly helps to give the newcomers the idea thatthey are really welcome.To get to the technical part. I read Yachts and Yachting, might be oneof the few outside GBR, and of course congratulate you with the articlein the January issue but what they say otherwise about the Contenderis not very complimentary. Not a boat with a nineties feeling, etc.Might not be true in reality, but the image is spread and that certainlydoes not help. Where were all those in their twenties at Looe? Witha few exceptions everybody was sailing Contender for ages and hadnot started sailing Contender instead of an Optimist.I do not propose radical changes, in fact I do not propose any changes

at all. I propose a rational discussion about possible changes in thefuture. One could set the conditions for these changes, like not adding(much) costs to the boat, not immediately disadvantaging existingboats, making the Contender more manoeuvrable, etc. People whoare more technical then I am, could make a list of possible changes,their advantages and disadvantages, the entry date if they wereadopted and we could talk about it for some time before discussing itat the AGM.That could be a nice task for the technical committee. Not proposingchanges they favour, but making such a list, with their opinion on theadvantages and disadvantages. Guess they find more disadvantages,but then we on the net and publications in the national newsletterscould make the list more complete.17th March: Jerry Driscoll, UK.Evert-Ben recently made a reference to a document circulated at theBritish Nationals at Looe last year. This was an article written for theUK class magazine. As the author of the said “rambling” document Iwould like to add a couple of comments to the debate. ..//.. The articlewas distributed for the BCA AGM and the issue of “the future” wasdiscussed at length by those attending (most of those entered for thechampionship). The general feeling from the floor agreed with thegeneral conclusions of the article that the Contender is stillfundamentally a “good product”, but suffers from a poor image: “anold class”, “a class superceded by the RS600” etc. There was avirtually universal view that the boat should not be changed - one ofthe strengths was considered to be the fact that older boats can stillbe competitive, maintaining the depth of the class. The feeling wasthat the class should take a more active role in promotion rather thantry and tweak the design.The article in Yachts & Yachting that Evert-Ben mentions was onestep in attempting to remind sailors that the class is alive and well (Ihave to say that I did not notice any negative comments in it - I thoughtit was very positive). The BCA also extended its space at Sailboat,the UK Dinghy Exhibition in London (and as a result had a muchbetter position) and displayed three boats; two new, and one 10 yrold secondhand with a £1500 price tag. It was sold by lunchtime onthe first day (Sandy tells me he could have sold it four times over bythe end of the day!). The general response was very good, with manyserious enquiries. It was quite noticeable that the extra space, thebetter position, and recent publicity has started to have an impact -we had quite a number of people comment that the class seems tobe doing well, which was a nice change from “well, how are you doingagainst...” One of the biggest problems we have hit is that we actuallyhave a shortage of secondhand boats! Over the last 4 months, 19secondhand boats have been sold off the class list.18th March: Mike Beggs, UKI trial sailed the Vortex today which is en-route to Quiberon for theISAF trials. It is a little catamaran. It has the following advantagesover the Contender:-1) It costs new £4,000 complete with trolley and cover.2) It is marketed and promoted by Laser. Therefore it will get manypages of colour advertising in yachting magazines. It will also gettaken to Quiberon with full support team, spares, workshop etc. Itwas shown at the London Boat Show. It has a permanent professionaldemonstration team touring the country.3) It will get a Class Association set up and financed by Laser.4) It is a stable platform, sails well to windward with helmsman justsat on the side even in Force 3, doesn’t capsize when gybing asboom is high and doesn’t hit the water, no kicker to get hung upon, ideal for geriatric sailors.These are it’s only advantages, except perhaps a lower PortsmouthYardstick if that is an advantage.It has a few disadvantages, like only two points of sail, windward andoff the wind. It doesn’t sail downwind (except I’m told in a very strongwind) like most catamarans. Therefore not much fun to sail. Dagger

Contendering - July 20008board and dagger rudder, easy to damage. No means to tension rig.Non-adjustable mainsheet jammer. Only luff tension can be adjustedfrom trapeze. Kicker is central and outhaul on boom!Why am I telling you this? Because you will note that none of itsadvantages are things with which the Contender Class can compete.Tweaking the rig will not give any advantages, just make all the existingboats obsolete.Therefore Contender sailors, including Evert-Ben van Veen, bethankful that you have a boat which is more fun to sail, needs moreskill to control, has a large worldwide fleet, can be bought cheaplysecond hand and has an established Class Association.So enjoy sailing what you’ve got, concentrate on promoting theContender and don’t get too paranoid about other boats.28th March: Stuart Jones, Chairman, British ContenderAssociation..//.. I believe that we have got a great boat already and goodorganisation. That is not to say that more could be done, it’s up toeveryone in the class, not just the various committees, to keep theclass healthy, whether at the organisational, promotional or class rulelevel.On the subject of class rules, some people always seem to think thatthe boat needs altering in some way. Yes, I believe small and steadychanges can be made, more to improve the equipment that we alreadyhave and take advantage of new building techniques etc. Wholesalechanges to speed the boat up would be a disaster in terms of increasedcost and scrapping any boat over 5 years old. If we want to speedthe boat up to attract e.g. RS600 sailors then radical changes wouldbe required and we would probably end up looking like the RS600,so even more why buy a Contender. That’s a race we can’t win, sowhy not just promote the good things that we already have. A goodsolid boat that will hold together in all winds, has a good performanceand tight international class racing. ..//..28th March: Chris Mitchell, UK, ICA Chairman...//.. Seventh, and finally, for this round of the conversation, the ICAcommittee exists solely to serve its membership. Particularly Gil, butalso Manfred and Alan, put in a lot of time and effort to make surethat the class rules are correct, ISAF dues are paid, championshipsorganised etc etc. We also have real jobs. If the ICA membershipwant changes to the class such as weight reduction, bigger sails orwhatever, they need to be proposed to the ICA AGM, discussed andvoted on. The committee members may have their own views, but itis not their job to formulate wholesale changes to the class design. So, if you want to change the boat in some way, make a proposal, themore thought out the better. Present it at the AGM. Defend it. See itput to a vote. If there is the support, then a change can be made. Ihave tried to chair the AGMs in a non-partisan way as I believe that isthe function of a chairman, but that does not mean that I am opposedto changes.28th March: Alan Mollatt, UK, ICA Technical ChairmanWell, Evert-Ben, Leo and Ian and sparked off quite a debate. May Ias the current ICA technical chairman, add some comments.First - I am pleased that a robust good humoured debate is happening- it shows that Contender sailors really do care about their class - andI note that all the contributors are regular sailors. a) Leo appears to believe that the ICA “board” may be responsiblefor having their own agenda and not progressing the wishes of themembership. I do not believe this to be true. What I have noticed isthat until now it has been difficult to know the feelings of the largeInternational membership - the only time we get any form of directiveis at the ICA AGM, which usually is attended by only a relativelysmall group of sailors. I am pleased to note that the E-mail forum isencouraging a wider and faster exchange of ideas, and hope that itwill continue well into the future.

b) The formal arrangement, by which proposals are put forward atthe AGM, discussed and voted on, and if the AGM wishes changesto be made, are put out to postal ballot, is very slow, and does actagainst change. For instance I am thinking about proposing ways ofchanging this to be more modern and efficient, but even that willrequire us to wait till an AGM, followed by a postal ballot-and possiblyeven ratification at the next AGM - then a submission to ISAF to getthe rules changed. Experience shows that this can take over 2 years- see what I mean?c) I have attended many of the ICA AGM’s over the 25 years I havesailed a Contender (am I really that old?). I can assure Leo and Benthat since the earliest days, proposals to modify the Contender tomake it technically more up to date, and in particular to reduce theweight have come up frequently. The only time I remember an AGMvoting for a change was to allow the Australians to experiment with aBalsa sandwich hull. Otherwise the membership - NOT the ICAcommittee, have voted against change. I personally do believe thata reduction in weight to make the boat easier to handle ashore, andpossibly marginally quicker to reach planing speed, would bedesirable. It was in fact myself who proposed again at Sydney thatwe go for a phased reduction in weight, but the majority at AGMdisagreed.d) The Contender IS an old design, there is no getting away from it.And a classic, years ahead of its time when it arrived. No-one hascome up with anything like as good an all rounder. The nearest is theCanoe - and that’s even older. The new boats challenging theContender make great use of modern building methods and material,and use devices such as racks. Frankly they are not as pleasant tosail as a Contender, unless you are stuck on a small river or pondwith light breezes. I get the feeling that they sacrifice robustness forlightness. I don’t see many changes that we can make that wouldimprove the Contender, without making such radical changes thatwould show the world that we are trying to be “modern”. If we needcosmetic changes to make it appeal to the young, so be it. However,as Evert-Ben says - it is a good exercise to list the changes - this isthe right place to make your ideas known. I will take note, and ifenough ideas come up will publish them for further discussion. ..//..29th March: Evert-Ben van Veen, NetherlandsHi everybody, I have greatly enjoyed the discussion on the netconcerning the future of our boat thus far, liked many responses, didnot fully understand other. ..//..I also did not understand what that story about the Vortex had to dowith my position. If it is not about the Vortex, which of all these moderndesigns is the most ugly, at least on the pictures, as such but aboutthe differences between the resources of MOD builders and us, poorICA member, we come to a completely different issue. I haven’tunderstood that yet. These MOD builders can profit from the‘economics of scale’. But they can also profit from the lack ofcompetitors. The first is good from a consumer point of view, thelatter is not. On the average their prices are too high and this probablygoes to large Mercedes for the “CEO’s” [ed: are you reading this NickPeters!?] of these builders, but also in the promotion of the class oroff-springs like the Vortex or Eps (another ugly boat). Now, I wonder,why we, paying our yearly dues to the ICA, our building certificateswith every new boat, and not having Mercedes driving and CEO’sliving on our expenses, do not have a solid promo budget. Perhapssomeone can explain that to me sometime. But this is a side-issue tothe main point, the ‘modernity’ of the class.About that issue many wise things have been said. About fun in theclass, about the need to keep older boats part of the Contendercommunity (you should know that we - the DCA - just introduced aspecial prize for the first boat overall at our Nationals older then 15years), about the Contender still being a Contender. But that will notalter with allowing some incremental changes in due time, which wouldallow for adoption of modern possibilities which fit in the concept ofthe Contender as it is.

Contendering - July 2000 9These developments are already happening within the class rules,making older boats outdated just because Wavelength or Vitoexploited the margins of the hull shape better. I thought of buying theAustralian King Contender, left in Germany after the ’99 worlds.Everybody told me that it was an extremely well built boat (“a greatimprovement to both Rondar and Ridge/Wavelength/Hoare”), butbased on a Rondar hull shape. So what, I have been passed byquite a lot of Rondars at the last GBR nationals. But that was me,and independent sources and better sailors say that the Rondar isjust slightly slower on choppy waters. Apparently, within the existingrules a hull shape which is used by about half of the fleet is already‘outdated’ for serious top racing. But still, our colleagues can have alot of fun in it and compete and beat other sailors, like me. So, do nottell me that lowering the overall weight with about 5 kilo’s (perhapsincluding the centreboard, - so add the present min. weight ofcentreboard and hull, lower that with 5 kilos altogether’ - that wouldsave a hassle at the measurement) starting from 2005 would seriouslysplit the class. To most it would just mean to take off the lead, or - inthe combined scenario - thinking of changing that much batteredcentreboard for a newer, lighter one. It would also be a great relief tothe builders as at the moment they find it very difficult to built the boatnot too light. It would not make the class much faster, but much moremanoeuvrable, certainly on shore.More technical persons might think of better possibilities. I do notthink that any of the ‘modernists’ opts for racks or whatever otherradical changes which would alter the concept of the Contender.Nobody has proposed anything like that. But it always more easy tolaugh about the extremes of one’s opponents view, especially as henever mentioned these, than to seriously consider the much lessextreme and therefore much more nearby issues.Which brings me to the AGM. An issue should be seriously presentedthere, well prepared, etc. I have only attended one AGM, but thatwas not my impression of that meeting.Anyhow, this whole discussion is not about altering the class, butabout a keeping alive a boat which is just so good to look at, sail in,which lasts long (also 5 kilos lighter!) and where you have met manyfriends by the years, If we want to keep large fleets, value for ourboats on the second handed market, see new faces, we will have towork for it. Sometimes that also means accepting small changes.29th March: Marc Davies, UKI have recently tried out a Contender and really enjoyed it - A fewproblems getting out on the wire quickly, and hard work to right, butapart from that - great. Simple, great looking boat that lasts, anddoesn’t cost a fortune. Makes a lot of sense to me! You get a lotmore sailing time than on something more extreme / fragile. ..//.. Itend to agree with gradual development, where it has something toadd, but not for the sake of fashion. There are clear reasons forbuying a Contender, and in spite of relatively huge marketing budgets,surprisingly few boats seem to get sold. I note from the Y&Y classesreview that 15 new Contenders were sold I think in the UK last year.Not bad on a close to zero promotional budget!30th March: Chris Mitchell, UK, ICA ChairmanWe are beginning to get good discussions going so I’d like to makesome proposals about rule changes for discussion prior to the AGM. As Alan Mollatt has already said, it takes ages to get a rule changethrough, but maybe we can change that too.1. Hull weight. I’m not sure that a 5 or even 10kg reduction willmake a huge difference to the speed, but it would certainly make theboat easier to handle on shore. We would need to do a reductiongradually. Step one ought to be increasing the permitted weight ofcorrectors to say 10kg, for a hull weight of 83, and then reducing say2 kg per year to a hull weight of say 77kg, which would mean someboats would still have 4kg of correctors. We could then review thesituation and decide if we want to continue.

INNOVATINGSINCE 1945

INNOVATING

Photography:

IngridAbery

HO L T A L L EN P E R FORMANCE SA I L BOAT HARDWARE

RevolutionaryWire Frame

Swivel Arm Cam Base

RevolutionaryWire Frame

Swivel Arm Cam Base

The toughestrange of small boat

Ball Blocks

The toughestrange of small boat

Ball Blocks

Tel: +44 (0) 20 8870 9044 Fax: +44 (0) 20 8874 3607e-mail: sales@holtallen.co.uk

www.holtallen.co.uk

Hi-LoadComposite

Cam Cleats

Hi-LoadComposite

Cam Cleats

UniqueDynamic Bearing System

(Patent Applied For)

UniqueDynamic Bearing System

(Patent Applied For)

T h e C omp l e t e S a i l b o a t S o l u t i o nT h e C omp l e t e S a i l b o a t S o l u t i o n

Rigging

Accessories

Rigging

Accessories

Contendering - July 2000102. Carbon spars. Graham Scott tells me that it is getting more difficultto get the aluminium tubes for mast construction. I would like topropose that we permit carbon spars, reduce the mast weight to 5kg, and to simplify life allow the boom to be a simple tube and hencewe would also need loose footed sails - currently not allowed. Theboom/sail change will make little difference to speed. The carbonmasts for the first couple of years could have a 2kg corrector whichcould be removed in due course so that we don’t all have to rush outand buy a new mast immediately.3. Foils. I think the weight here could be reduced a little and weshould also free up the rudder shape and make the centreboard amore simple (and sensible ) shape. I wonder if a foil maker has anyviews on this? Could the foils be easier and cheaper to make?To reiterate, I don’t think these changes will suddenly make the boatinto a Devoti-killer, but they will help maintain a modern image, mayhelp control costs in the future, and may help with supply problems. Lets hear from you.......30th March: Stuart Jones, Chairman, BCAChris’s ideas for rule changes are all pretty sensible I think althoughI would still worry about older boats, there are still a lot of regularlyraced boats that couldn’t be reduced in weight. Would they alldisappear from the race circuit as soon as the first weight reductioncame in? Can we hear from some older boat owners?? I believe wecan only make steady considered changes, but we do need a way ofspeeding the rule changing process up. The foot blocks change firstcame up at the AGM in Weymouth and has only just made it into therules. I for one would welcome a change in boom design/material asour current ones are not up to it. They break too easily and they aresupposed to be straight. It’s not possible as first bit of breeze andyou’ve got a banana.30th March: Jerry Driscoll, UKChris, 1. Personally I think you’d need at least a 10Kg weight reductionin the boat to make it worthwhile - anything less is probably only“tinkering”, and reducing the weight seems to me a fairly risky strategyif the gain is only minimal. The vast majority of existing boats do nothave the maximum 6Kg of correctors, so will not be able to reach thenew minimum (I’m not sure that a couple of Kg make a huge differenceanyway - my boat is about 20Kgs overweight the moment I get in it!),but it is not only the overall reduction in weight that is at issue whenconsidering the “grandfathering” factor; weight distribution also comesinto it. Indirectly Chris is suggesting an uncorrected weight reductionfrom 77Kg to 73Kg. It doesn’t sound a lot, but I’m sure most builderswill want to get it out of the ends first, which is likely to exaggerateany performance difference between old and new boats.2. I have to admit I’m a bit of a convert to carbon spars, and I thinkthis is probably a good idea to at least allow some experimentationwith masts. As far as the boom is concerned that’s a big yes fromme. As Stuart says the metal ones are crap - anyone wants to buyany half booms, give me a call! Another plus is that carbon boomsare much lighter, and they don’t hurt your head so much!3. Foils: Its before my time, but wasn’t the weight limit introduced tocounter the fact that they had a nasty tendency to break?As Chris says this won’t make the boat a Devoti beater, but so what? Does the boat really have a particularly old image? (other than ussailors that is) We certainly have a very male image - has anyone outthere any ideas how the boat might be made more appealing to theother half of the sailing community?30th March: Ian Renilson, UK Chris, ..//.. One other idea, which is perhaps a bit too radical a change,but I mention it for comments: The other thing that makes theContender difficult to sail is the low boom - it makes it difficult to tackand gybe, and it tips you in on a reach when it gets caught by waves.Perhaps we could raise it a bit as well - 100 mm higher would make aworld of difference. I guess this could be achieved with a minimum

leech length. Or perhaps we could be radical and go for a completelynew rig design to raise the boom so you can run through (like theDevoti)! Mind you, I’m not sure I’m up to running through - I like myrest half way through the tack as I lie on the floor.30th March: Damian Bridge, AustraliaAs a founding member of the World Association of Fat Contendersailors I say the idea of raising the boom will increase the sailabilityof the boat as well as making it more attractive to new comers... inthat they will get going a lot faster and have the inclination to tackrather than “bang the sides”!30th March: Dirk Huizinga, Netherlands...//.. Few observations however:In Holland we have 53 National and International classes and adeclining amount of sailors that actually race, that is not because theStar is so cheap (20,000 US$, is a lot money for me). The Starnationals (if even sailed) may have 5-8 Dutch competitors (hardlyany new faces). The cheaper J-22 more then 40 and classes like theYngling are simply killed over the last two of years by such fields inHolland.Speaking to these sailors, they all mention one important thing: theone design principle not the fancy or cheap or tech sailing boat butthe idiot proof (and therefore cheaper on the long run) one design,with all it’s imperfections.That same story goes for changing class rules Guys!! Watch it verycarefully because people get lost!!I know that after a while people like to have changes, because ofimperfections in design and material. Still as former National Coachfor the Laser, I remember the lively discussions about putting ironrings (2.50 US$ each) in the outhaul and cunningham lines to extendtheir life as part of the delay device that was made up of loops in thelines. It took more then 6 years to get them accepted. ..//.. Iunderstand the improvement by raising booms, taking off weight,(racks, gennakers) etc.. but I’d like to stress the effect that this mayhave in losing sailors or availability of older boats in a market. Classeslike the Hornet, Flying Junior, Fireball, 505 have done similar exercisesthe same to try to attract new sailors, with hardly any success. Evena high tech and innovating boat like the Flying Dutchman failed tokeep up, for whatever reason.The invoice for the class might be less sailors, people in general aresensitive to these changes.If we don’t care about growing as a class, go ahead. If we do takethis in consideration, we have to think carefully and be aware of ourposition. Don’t get me wrong - I’m in for innovations, but I’d like alarge class.31st March: Ian Renilson, UK..//.. We have a really great boat and we should sell that messagestrongly NOW. We should also look to the future. We sail a 33 yearold design of boat and it is a one design. It will go out of date andbecome obsolete by some time - I don’t know when but can youimagine it still being strong in 50 years time? Some might think so,but get real - what do the youngsters of today want to sail and whatwill the youngsters of the day after tomorrow want to sail? Why is theaverage age of Contender sailors (in the UK) around 35 and increasingeach year?I guess that any tinkering around that we do might extend the shelflife of the design by a small amount but the basic boat will not last forever. We will never be able to get up to the level of a well designedmodern boat and we should not try to compete on that level. Weshould accept that and get the most out of our ‘classic design’ of boatnow - having said that I think Chris’s suggestions make sense - phasedimprovements making a significant difference without affecting thebasic design and not making older boats obsolete. We would have abetter boat and increase the shelf life of the design. We should do it

Contendering - July 2000 11in one hit, use it as a marketing hook, and then get on with sailing -and promoting - our wonderful (improved) boat. Most of thesuggestions were around 10 years ago and if we had done themthen ....31st March: Ian Baillie, UKIn reply to the correspondence regarding Contender improvements Iwould like to add a few thoughts.1. Weight, maybes aye maybe no, there is no doubt that older boatswould become slower as the weight is reduced (most are probablyoverweight anyway). However, if the main reason is just to make theclass look more “modern” and the performance difference is minimal,then why bother. Secondhand values would suffer more from theperception of an overweight boat than the actual performance. But ifit must be done then I favour Ian R’s idea to do it big and do it soon.2. Carbon spars, definitely worth investigating especially booms. I’mreally fed up breaking them and they always break on the best sailingdays. But I did find a use for my last broken one, I persuaded mybrother in law that it would make a perfect pole to put his mail-box on.My sister wasn’t too pleased, but she’s speaking to me again. Otheruses I have found, I once fixed my Alfasud exhaust with a piece ofLaser boom, which kept it going until the MOT ran out. I must pointout I’m an Aberdonian.3. Something has to be done about the boom height. Ian R has theright idea with a reduced leech length, but this would have to go witha maximum forestay length too, otherwise the rake would just beincreased to suit the shorter leech. It’s not just newcomers that areput off by the low boom, when I’m tacking in a breeze I often wonder,will the boom sweep me into the sea? Will it bash my brains in? Willis snag on my back? Or catch a wave? Another 100mm would makea big difference, well it would almost double the space under theboom wouldn’t it?3rd April: Andrew Winkley, GermanyIan, Nice comments. I’m new to the Contender class in 2000 andselected the boat for a variety of reasons, amongst which were thefact that it seems to be a great fun boat (this was confirmed thisweekend on my first outing) it has a stable class organisationthroughout the world. The boats keep their value and you don’t needto buy a new boat every year to be able to compete. Now here I amwith a ’92 Hein (GER-373) and if things go the way I am reading Imight as well trash the boat. I would support changes that centrearound the rig, and other hang on bits.6th April: Sebastian Munck, GermanyDear Contender Sailors! I spend lots of time thinking about rulechanges you were discussing at this e-news-forum.Mast: why should we use carbon in the future for the whole mast?Isn’t it possible to use just a carbon top? ..//.. This will lighten themast in a very useful way in the top and it is a not really expensivemethod to test advantage and disadvantage of carbon in spars.Boom: definitely use carbon!Hull: You are thinking about reducing the hull weight. I think it will bevery useful for women or younger sailors because you can handlethe boat easier - not in the water but after sailing and for transport.Older boats can be used for races too, if the weight is reduced for afew kilograms. You only have to add a swinging-test into contenderrules like the Int. Europe class have. It won’t be possible for anyboat builders to reduce only the weight of the ends...10th April: Alan Mollatt, UK, ICA Technical ChairmanDear Everybody who loves Contenders, regarding rules changes.Lot’s of good ideas. Keep them coming.I will put together a proposal for carbon fibre booms for this year’sAGM. I have already asked for expert advice on the sizes, and weightthat will be required, as they will be different to those in the current

rules. There may good reason to allow bigger diameter alloy boomsas well (they won’t be faster but they may last longer). I am advisedthat a change may be needed to allow loose-footed mainsails to gowith the carbon boom. Any comments on that from all you expertsout there?MASTS I would like to see a proposal for carbon masts go forward.Again we will need to frame new rules to gain full benefit from doingthis, as the sizes and weight limits in our rules will not be appropriate.What do you all think about reducing or even removing the restrictionson size/weight/materials of the spars and therefore allowing them todevelop? If there was significant development, would the old concernsabout cost still apply? and if so, are they still appropriate? Experienceshows that when a rig becomes fashionable (e.g. the currentWavelength) it appears throughout the fleet quite quickly - so somehowthe majority have found the extra money. If the majority want theContender to develop or modernise, should we accept that there willbe some financial penalty, by way of increasing cost?Is anyone thinking about trying out a carbon mast (or the clevercompromise of a carbon top). I think we should encourage this byallowing a dispensation for a couple of test rigs to race - it is expensiveand time consuming to develop a rig, and the best place to test anddemonstrate it will be in real races, what do you think out there?In the past, to allow a dispensation it has been necessary to vote atan ICA AGM and then have a world wide vote. I think this too clumsya procedure. I suggest could we for instance allow the Technicalrepresentatives to vote on behalf of their country, and the ICAcommittee recommend action based on that. If the dispensation wasgranted for a limited period (say 2 years), then after evaluationsubmitted to a full vote (a report to all ICA members would be required[ed: that’s all individual members of each national association]) forimplementation. Your opinions please.10th April: Damian Bridge, AustraliaI am sure that a mast manufacturer who knows they were to benefitout of the rule changes may donate a mast for evaluation purposes. We have to be careful with this as the 49er took a lot of broken mastsbefore they perfected theirs. (I witnessed this while at WoolharaSailing Club).11th April: Lars, DenmarkGood fun with a carbon mast, but I think is much more useful to discusschanges to the sail instead. A carbon mast might be a little better,but a larger sail (or another sail-design) will be a radical change tothe class, and cheap because the sail has to be changed now andthen anyway. Another sail-design might also change the position ofthe boom, so it’s possible to pass under it, and reach, tack and gybewithout capsizing all the time.11th April: Chris Mitchell, UK, ICA ChairmanThese ideas seem to be gaining support. We should certainly examinethe prospect of carbon booms and loose footed sails. I’ll have onetomorrow if I can have a dispensation!The mast problem is that the aluminium tubing is getting harder tofind and hence will go up in price. Its an Aerospace product and theyare changing to carbon! Thus, if we stick with aluminium we will haveto accept a price rise. It seems opportune to develop a carbon mast. Graham Scott tells me that this change will not suddenly make itpossible to use mylar sails, so we are not risking having to buycompletely new rigs. If we open up the rules on the mast we can losesome weight from the all up total and also benefit from the lowerinertia of a lighter mast. I’ll have a dispensation for that too!!Nobody’s really commented on the foil changes - they could be a bitlighter without breaking and could certainly be better shapes - anytakers???

Contendering - July 200012

You’d be wrong if you thought the messages were only about class politics.Some are just simple requests about the best way to do some things...

24th March: Ian Renilson, UKTACKING A CONTENDER: I wrote the following notes to helpsomeone who is struggling to tack a Contender. Any other comments?[Ed: this is an alternative to the Stuart Jones method in the March 2000beginners guide]

Tacking a Contender is quite different to other boats. It’s not difficult –it just requires learning a new technique. This is what I do:1. Full trapezing – ready for tack.2. Uncleat main sheet (if cleated) & pass into back hand.3. Front hand to handle & lift body up to disengage hook.4. Initiate tack & swing in as the boat tacks (keep boat level/ pull itover on top of you to roll tack in lighter winds). In lighter windspulling in the main slightly helps the boat into the tack – butremember to let it out again.5. Lay down inside the cockpit to let the boom pass – I stick myfront leg up the front of the cockpit because I’m stiff and can’t bendenough.6. Move across the boat (facing the way you are going), swingaround the tiller extension, and pass the sheet into the (old) fronthand (it’s still the front hand) – ensure mainsheet has not re-cleated and make sure you steer all the way through the tack.7. Turn around like a conventional tack (facing forward) and sit onthe side deck, steering behind your back and with the mainsheetstill in the old front hand (new back hand), uncleated.Note: I think this is a crucial point – when you get to this point youshould be through the eye of the wind (onto or past the new closehauled course) and you are in complete control – even if youcannot get out on the wire you can dump main sheet while sittingon the side deck so you are safe – I sometimes do this when it ishonking.8. I then do different things in different wind strengths, but generallyit is as follows:· Pick up the tiller extension with the new back hand which still

holds the mainsheet· Bring my new front hand around and grab the trapeze ring to

hook on.· Go out grabbing the mainsheet from the back hand on the way.Note: I always try not to cleat the mainsheet – I want to be able tocontrol the main right through the tack.Tacking is more difficult if the centreboard is fully down because theboat will not go off the wind so easily after the tack – I think the boardshould be back 20 to 30 degrees to keep the boat balanced upwindand this helps coming out of the tack.24th March: Andrew Belson, UK.Ian, Thanks for your article on tacking. I am not too proud to admitthat this sort of information is exactly what I need. I am in the positionof learning to sail whilst learning to Contend so I need lots of help. Iwas interested to read you face forward. This is what I haveinstinctively been doing and fits with the standard centre mainpractice. Last week I tried facing to the rear as the sailor does on thevideo clip I downloaded from the International Contender site does. He also clearly cleats his sheet. I know you are not saying ‘My wayis the only way’ but I am relieved to read I have not wasted the lastsix months since I bought the boat sailing it incorrectly.Please don’t think we are all old hands and sometimes the obvious ismore useful than a subtle tweak because some (like me) sail awayfrom other Contender sailors.27th March: Klaus Eiermann, Germany.Hello Guys, many thanks for Ian’s article on tacking. I’m also a newby

in the Contender and for me this sort of information is very helpful.Can anyone give a similar article on the centreboard positions indifferent conditions (light wind, medium, heavy) and on the differentcourses (windward leg, reach, downwind)? Any help appreciated!28th March: Stuart Jones, UKThe first thing to say is that nothing in sailing is a perfect science andthis goes for centreboard position. The main thing is not to get hungup about the fact that your settings may be slightly different to others,about right will make little noticeable difference. This goes for mostthings in contendering. That said, a rough guide :-Light WindsUpwind: Trailing edge slightly off vertical, about 10 degrees backReach: 45 degrees backRun:75 degrees back - some people pull it all the way up, but trythis without the rudder on and you will find the boat goes fairlyquickly round into wind, therefore, with the rudder on you must befighting this movement. Some plate down and the boat goesstraight. Also a minor point, but the bottom of the board becomesthe trailing edge, as far as water flow is concerned, as it’s rakedback which is round and bulbous compared with the real trailingedge. Just a bit harder for water to flow round.Medium winds:As for light winds, but Upwind, raise the board back another 10 - 20degrees to let the bow drop off and relieve weather helm,particularly in waves. On the run, if there is a danger of rolling,stick the board down as far as 45 degrees.Strong Winds:Upwind: As you are now not trying to point, raise the board to letthe bow fall off and reduce weather helm. How far? I hear you say.Well, at least 20 to 30 degrees back from vertical and in extremeconditions 45 degrees back. This also causes the board to haveslightly less area and less leverage, therefore less to trip up on,particularly in gusty conditions. I’ll be making more leewaythough? No, because as the water flows faster over the foils themore efficient they become. The same amount of lift is producedfrom less area.Reach: 45 degrees back.Run:35 - 45 degrees back. If its rolly a bit more board and a heavytiller hand can stop it.You may have noticed that the board can get set the same for allpoints of sailing in extreme conditions. Fine, set it at the start anddon’t move it (unless conditions change!!!) one less problem in ablow. Pull it out when capsized though!!!If in doubt, upwind, it is usually better to rake back further than youwould have thought.A good idea is to mark the board so you can see at a glance where itis. (I don’t, however, as I just judge it by eye, but I plan to this yearafter all this time!!!)In a breeze don’t put the board down until you have rounded theleeward mark, or you’ll trip over it as you round up onto the beat.Stay manfully out on the trapeze and this will prevent a visit to thethird batten. Likewise, in a breeze, try to lift the board as you approachthe windward mark on the beat. Finally make sure the board uphauland downhaul work in all conditions so that you can move it at willand from all sailing positions.28th March: Marc Davies, UKI really enjoyed a Contender when I tried one a while back. A coupleof problems did come to light though - the first was righting the thingafter a miscalculation; I found it quite hard to do, and at 14 stone, I’mno lightweight. Secondly, I found getting out on the wire quickly aproblem - I guess I was probably on too long a setting - in a lot of the

& YET MORE E-MAIL ...

Contendering - July 2000 13pictures I’ve seen since, people seem to trapeze quite short. Is thiswhat these new cockpit floor blocks are for?31st March: Ian Baillie, UK..//.. to answer a question about capsizing, let the kicker right off beforeyou try to right the boat otherwise you have a nice stiff leech underthe water. Neil Wilson told me that when I was new to the class. Hewatched me struggle for a while first mind you. He’s like that.7th May: Cal Hawkes, USAI have been fixing up an old Contender (circa 1968) and have a coupleof questions.1) When I sail water gets into the centerboard trunk, hits the back,and shoots up into the boat. The faster I go, the higher the fountain.Is this normal?2) Perhaps related to the above, there is a rubber gasket on the bottomwhere the centerboard trunk meets the hull. It is held in place byabout 30 screws. It doesn’t seem like a good idea to have so may

screws through the hull below the waterline. How do newer boatssolve this problem? Any information would be greatly appreciated.8th May: Kirk Price, USACal, I have not seen others do this, but it worked well for me: Insteadof screws, I used double-stick tape to attach the centerboard gasket. The gasket was made by laminating several layers of mylar sail clothtogether. The tape was the type with a foam layer, from the localhardware store. I like it: no leaks.8th May: Damian Bridge, AustraliaWhat about Contact Cement?8th May: Sebastian Munck, GermanyRemember: if the flaps are damaged, you have to change them. Donot use any glue or cement which is not possible to replace on thehull. I have never liked the glued flaps.Well, that’s the lot. For the moment...

REPORTS & RESULTSREPORTS & RESULTS2000 NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP

The contender nationals were held over 4 days, onthe second May bank holiday weekend at East LothianYacht Club, North Berwick, Scotland. Conditions forthe 57 entries, seven from overseas including USAand Canada, varied from flat calm to an outrageous45 knots, both, as it happens, on the same day.

The sailing was as much a test of clothing as it wasboat handling and speed, due to the unseasonablyvaried weather and the northern latitude. Many asouthern softie being caught out with only theirsummer wet suit to hand.

As a prelude to the sailing, the fleet was asked tovote on a variety of courses, the top four of whichwere then used on a proportional basis during theracing. For the first day, a standard olympic coursewas set, to the relief of many, as a solid five to sixwith occasional puffs was blowing, broad reachingand one gybe per lap was definitely favoured. Thefleet got away cleanly, thumping into the lumpy seasof the Firth of Forth, and saw a tight fought battlefor the lead with all the pre-race favourites in theleading bunch. Graham Scott, the defendingchampion, capitalised on others mistakes to finish thehour long short format race in the lead with IanRenilson, still dining out on his Endeavour Trophy win,a while ago, close behind. Andy Potter, known as aheavy weather expert slipped into third helped atouch by the fact that a few others had blindly ignoredthe upwind gate on the first lap.

The second race was a near carbon copy with all theusual suspects to the fore, revelling in the perfectContender conditions, although a touch more heatwould have been appreciated, however. Renilsonagain sailed consistently to finish second to Germanhelm Gabriel Wicke who had spent most of theprevious week out practicing with him. Tim Holden,another heavy weather enthusiast, took ful ladvantage coming third with Scott in fourth.

A full Burns night experience, with all the trimmingsof bagpipes, whisky, haggis and poetry was followedby a lighter and thankfully warmer day. A trapezoidcourse was set in the East bay and with a short beatto the first mark the fleet was tightly packed, testingrules knowledge and observance along with tacticalknow-how to the limit. Potter was first to show butwas buried on the following run, against the tide,when John Browett took a favourable breeze out tosea to lead at the bottom. Scott and Stuart Jonesfollowed up with Neil Rosie close behind. This grouppulled away from the pack to finish in that order.

The next race was notable for a bevy of new faces atthe front. Most of the frontrunners suffering fromself inflicted bad starts or first beats. Once again therun turned out to be decisive with a bunch breakingclear of the pack. The finishing order being Rosie,Nigel Walbank, Gary Langdown and Adrian Conway.Scott and Renilson began to create a gap on theleader board by tagging onto the back of this pack.

The wind eased somewhat for the final race of theday and with a change of tide the inshore route wasfavoured. Jones found this to be so by using the oldtrick of tacking off on port when getting a bad start.He led clearly at the first mark and was never headedon the slow one lap race. Rosie completed a fineday with a second to position himself third overall, acause he was seen to celebrate later that night. CrisMiles in a borrowed boat was third with a fastimproving Richard “Bonkers” Batten just behind.Some of the other front runners wobbled a bit in thisone but Scott slipped in for a very useable seventh,which would turn out to be his worst of the series.Consistency was now beginning to pay, especially asonly one discard would be allowed out of the tenscheduled races. A good proportion of the fleet hadcomfortably got many a discard under their belts.

The third day, Monday, proved to be one of thosedays that will be talked about for sometime to comeand will no doubt be embellished on by bar bores

Contendering - July 200014that do that sort of thing. It started quietly enoughwith a force 2 from the west, which was forecast todrop as the heat built inland. So it seemed, as at thesecond attempt, the fleet got away. For a whole lapall was normal, until a monstrous black cloudappeared, casting down monsoon-like rain and athirty degree windshift containing wind at 45 knots,blowing the spray off the wave tops. A goodproportion of the fleet saw waterspouts. With thethreat of even more right behind the race officer,rightly, abandoned the race and sent the fleetscuttling ashore.

An hour later we were back out in bright sunshineand a force 2. This time Jones got the first beat rightand lead for the first lap, followed by Renilson andKeith Paul with a pack close behind. However, atthis point another storm was making its way alongthe opposite coast of the Firth, prettily flashinglightning around. For sometime this had no effecton the wind but as the beat progressed, and in asmuch time as it takes to say “capsize”, half the fleetdid as the wind once more got up into the forties,shifting round alarmingly. Renilson and Paul, beingtowards the cloud were hit by the squall first. Paultook a dip as Renilson beam reached towards thewindward mark. The fleet followed in various statesof disarray. The main tactical assessment to be madebeing whether to gybe and capsize or granny roundat the wing mark. It’s debatable which was quicker.The race, thankfully, was shortened with Renilsonleading home those still standing. Scott, Wicke andJones followed up. A testament to the strength ofthe design is that despite the severe conditions onlyone mast and a boom were broken, taking bothstorms into account. When the going gets tough,don’t be seen out in a new class!

As the storm moved out to sea the wind went withit, leaving hailstones as a final farewell. The secondrace of the day started in wind from the oppositedirection, which was now light and fickle and as thestart gun went it faded completely. Most of the timeit was impossible to tell where the wind was comingfrom as the leftover swell knocked any wind out ofthe sail. Half the fleet had a go in the lead and theleast said about this race the better. It should berecorded that most of the frontrunners managed adecent result all the same. Wicke won and wasfollowed home by Potter, Scott and Renilson.

As the final day dawned with 3 races remaining themain prize was between the ever consistent Scott andRenilson, although with only one discard anythingcould still happen. The next positions were Browett,Jones and Wicke.

A steady force 3 blew out of the west with bright sunfor the whole day as a nice finale. It was Jones wholed at the first mark of the “P” shaped course, neverto be headed, although pushed hard by Renilson onthe last reaches. Batten sailed well to finish third justin front of Browett. Scott’s slip to sixth to allowedRenilson to get level on points overall. The next racewas a near carbon copy with Jones again leadingfrom start to finish and Renilson close behind. Scott

this time followed up, with Browett once more infourth. The gap was now one point in Renilson’sfavour, but with Scott counting nothing worse thanseventh, a sailing down the fleet seemed in order, asRenilson would then have to count a 13th, unluckyfor him.

The chase was on, but Scott was not his usual clinicalself or has just gone soft as Renilson wormed free toget a good start. At the first mark Browett led fromRenilson, Scott and Jones. Up the beat the inshoreroute seemed to be paying and the leaders went inclose company towards the shore. Scott, however,tried a last attempt to retrieve things by going aloneout to sea. There was not much in it but enough todrop him back to fifth. In the meantime, Jones hadsqueezed past into the lead once more to claim aclean sweep on the day. Renilson showed fineoffwind technique to slip comfortably into second toadd the Nationals to his trophy collection of Worlds,Europeans and Endeavour won in the past. Not bad.Browett and Wicke followed him home.

Ian Renilson, after taking one of the prizes kindlydonated by Holts, thanked East Lothian YC for a finelyrun regatta at one of the nicest and certainlyfriendliest venues that you could hope for. The thankswere very much echoed by all that attended.

Overall ResultsOverall ResultsOverall ResultsOverall ResultsOverall Results1st Ian Renilson Dalgety Bay2nd Graham Scott Weston3rd Stuart Jones Datchet4th John Browett Datchet5th Gabriel Wicke GermanyMaster Ian RenilsonGrand Master Keith Paul WestonGreat Grand Master

David Gautier DatchetJunior Matt Poynts HighcliffeNewcomer Nick Grace Highcliffe

Stuart Jones.

The Nationals - A Personal ViewIt has taken me a few days to recover from NorthBerwick and get back up to speed at work. I guessthat is the sign of a good championships! Both on thewater and ashore the UK national championships 2000seemed to live up to expectations.

We were all delighted at the turn out of 57. A bigthanks to those who travelled some distance to bethere - particularly those who came from overseas.

The concept of allowing competitors to vote on thecourse choice seemed to work well - although I don’tknow how you get over the fact that people will beinfluenced by the weather on the day of the vote. Inthe event the weather was certainly not typical(honestly ). We seemed to have a bit of everything.Day one was pretty breezy and bloody cold. Day twowas light and it was probably remarkable that threeraces were sailed. Day three is the one which willprobably go down in the class annals - racing got underway after one general recall and the customary blackflag, one lap into the race there was a violent 30 degreewind shift and a line squall which registered 45 knotson the committee boat, with a further squal l

Contendering - July 2000 15

HIGHCLIFFE SCThe first event of the Contender Association’s 2000National Travellers Trophy took place at HighcliffeSailing Club over the weekend of 8/9 April. 22 soulsattended a meeting that would provide a good test ofboth light and heavy weather skills.

The forecast for Saturday suggested that the mainchallenge would be how to avoid sunburn while tryingto get out of the ebb tide, as the wind was unlikely toexceed 5 knots. Race one was won by the fleet’s GreatGrand Master (60) Keith Paul, followed by BernardShapley and Stacey Bray, these three being the oneswho went the furthest left on the first beat, to givethemselves a large lead which in the conditions wouldprove difficult to pull back. The second race was sailedin similar conditions and won by Stuart Jones, followedby Graham Scott and Keith Paul.

Sunday dawned with a forecast wind of 15 knots,increasing as the day progressed. Pleasingly it provedcorrect, ensuring the bigger boys could get out ontheir trapezes. Race 3 started in 17 knots. The fleetwent left, just like the previous day. Tim Holden led atthe first mark, but dropped it in on the gybe to letJones and Scott through. The wind continued toincrease, with the fourth race starting in 21 knots andfinishing in 25 knots. A lack of mistakes and goodfortune secured the final race for Jones after Scott fellfoul of a capsized Osprey. A large shift to the right onthe penultimate beat gave the chasing pack a goodlift, but not quite enough to displace Jones, Holdenand an improving Dave Davies in third.

Jones had secured the event though consistency, whilePaul again showed the “ youngsters” how to do it inboth light and strong conditions.

Overall ResultsOverall ResultsOverall ResultsOverall ResultsOverall Results1. Stuart Jones - Datchet Water Sailing Club 4 Points2. Keith Paul - Weston Sailing Club 8 Points3. Graham Scott - Weston Sailing Club 8 Points4. Tim Holden - Halifax Sailing Club 9 Points

Tim Holden

OXFORD SC15 Boats came to Oxford Sailing Club for the ContenderOpen Meeting on June 17 & 18th as part of theNational Travellers Series. Notable absentee’s Holden/Davies/Browett & Scott missed out on probably oneof the best events ever. The complete weekend wasakin to sailing in the Mediterranean, thirty degreesCelsius and force 3 to 4 winds, the only thing missingwere the topless nymphets on the beaches but wedid get a glimpse on Sunday (lucky sailboarders).

The first race started and Stuart Jones made hisintentions clear by leading all the way followed homeby Chris Mitchell (who says local knowledge doesn’tpay) and Richard (new Boat) Gimmler.

After a short respite whilst the course was reset thesecond race started in a little more breeze. This timeJones didn’t quite have things his own way, and itwas only when Mitchell uncharacteristically capsizedthat he took the advantage and sailed on to win. DavidAston also capitalized on this error but was unable tohold off Mitchell at the finish.

Amazingly England beat Germany in the evening andmany people were heard to be complaining of soreheads on Sunday morning.

The third race started after a general recall in very fickleconditions, Gary Langdown worked his way very nicelyon each leg of the course winning with RichardGimmler in close contention and Mike Keates nowmaking a showing in third.

Race Four started immediately after another generalrecall in a strengthening wind. Despite being buriedat the weather mark, Jones again used his skill andboatspeed to win from Langdown and Gimmler whowere now both putting together some impressiveresults. Mention should be made of Sandy Claphamwho not only led the race, but then capsized twiceand was heard being particularly vocal and expletiveon a number of occasions.

After lunch the final race again started with a generalrecall. Those playing the lefthand side of the courseall planed into the mark. Paul Walker led at the firstleeward mark when a sudden squall appeared fromnowhere and many of the front runners took a dip.From the melee appeared, you guessed it, Jones, butthis time pursued by Aston. Jones increased his leadslowly until the finish, winning again from Keates whopicked up an unbelievable shift on the last beat to pipAston on the line.

Overall Results:Overall Results:Overall Results:Overall Results:Overall Results:1st Stuart Jones – Datchet Water S.C.2nd Mike Keates – King Geroge S.C.3rd Ricahrd Gimmler – Rutalnd S.C.4th David Aston – Chew Valley Lake S.C.5th Sandy Clapham – Grimwith S.C.6th Gary Langdown – Highcliffe S.C.

Dave Aston

approaching and thoughts of the Dart championshipslast year the race was abandoned. Despite over halfthe fleet being flattened all the competitors were ableto sort themselves out and get ashore. The centre ofelectrical activity seemed to be moving away and sothe fleet was sent out for another go a couple of hourslater... it happened again, this time the wind was notquite as strong, but the violent wind swing made anonsense of the race. The line squall again flatteneda significant number and the rest blasted round in fearof being struck by lightning. Just to finish off a perfectday on the water there followed torrential rain, thenhail, a further 180 degree wind swing and the lastrace was sailed in virtually no wind but the sea stateof a force 4.

Not wishing to be outdone by the weather, three raceswere scheduled for the final day in sunshine and agradually freshening wind and all three were bangedin, giving the full series of 10 races over 4 days.

The race management in difficult conditions was reallyexcellent. In particular, the turnround of back to backraces was as good as I’ve seen anywhere. The club’shospitality and the social programme also seemed tostrike the right balance between being organised butrelaxed. All told, it was a lot of fun and if you missedit, you missed yourself !

Stewart Murdoch

Contendering - July 200016

PORTHPEAN SC14 Contenders made the trip to Porthpean in deepest“Kernow”. The forecast for the weekend lived up toit’s promises with a 20 knot North Westerly (offshore)for the Saturday. The racing started at 2pm to givethe furthest travellers (Tim Holden from Halifax) timeto get down to the venue. Two back to back raceseach lasting an hour and a half were sailed welloffshore in the bay, however to say the wind shiftswere “interesting” and brought no shortage of changesin fleet positions would be an understatement. Theonly competitor whose position was consistentthroughout, was Andrew Mason - in the clubhousewith a cuppa, he forgot his boat!

The first race was started with a strong port biasedline, and the fleet got away cleanly (just!). The greatquestion that entered every competitor mind “whichis the correct way up the beat?” proved largely elusive.However, those that went hard left proved correct onthe first beat with Tim Holden, Graham Scott, NigelWalbank and Gary Langdown clear up front with DavidDavies getting a huge personal late lift to enable himto join them at the windward mark. Places settledwith the front group swapping around until NigelWalbank had to stop and take his sail down to repairhis out-haul, and Gary Langdown kindly went for aswim on the run. By the time the second to last beatcame Tim Holden was clear of the chasing bunch.David Davies, at the back of the group, hit the righthand corner and came closest to catching him withGraham Scott now third and Dave Aston fourth. Finalpositions remaining the same.

The Second race followed a similar pattern of those

lucky enough to read the first beat correctly. The racingwas much closer in this race with Graham Scott andDavid Gautier (in his new boat) leading the way, withNigel Wallbank and Tim Holden in hot pursuit. Thefinal positions being Graham Scott first David Gautiersecond and Tim Holden third.

Saturday followed a pattern of previous years with thefleet walking the cliffs (1 mile) to Charlestown for afew beers and a pub meal. Old stories of drunkennights at previous events were told including the old“paisley pyjama” story from Bridlington, (alas I cannotname names!).

Sunday dawned for the Contender fleet and thearriving Tasar fleet (joining in for a one day open) withNorth Westerly Gales and rain. A few brave soulsdecided “it’s not that bad” but soon turned back to theshore as they were greeted with well over 30 knotsout of the shadow of the cliffs. Only Ian Marshall willknow how many times he actually capsized in the shorttime he was off the beach, but gladly, eventually hemade it back.

As Sunday was called off, only the two Saturday racescounted. Graham Scott and Tim Holden each havinga first and a third but Graham winning the second ofthe two races won the event. Both David Gautier andDavid Davies having a second and fifth but DavidGautier beating Davies in the second of the two racesplaced them third and fourth respectively. Yet anothergreat event from Cornwall, if you haven’t been beforeyou really should go! Good sailing, great beer andpasties.

Dave “Fatty” Davies

0002SERUTXIFGNINIAMER-NOITAICOSSAREDNETNOCHSITIRB!erehtuoyeeS.gnillevarterofebsliatedkcehcotelbasivdasiti-lanoisivorperaserutxifllatahtetonesaelP

EUNEV STNEVESRELLEVART TCATNOC STNEMMOC

etaD syaD .taN htroN htuoS tocS

yluJ1 2 swerdnAtS X pihsnoipmahCdednaHelgniShsittocS

1 2 retawsllU )yadhcae1-secarpacidnah2(yhporTttekriBdroL

8 2 yeliF X

8 2 naephtroP X X yarBycatS rasaThtiwtnioJ

51 2 yaTlayoR X keeWgniliaStsaoCtsaEfotraP

61 1 yellaVwehC X notsAevaD degnarraebotgniniarT/gniliasyadrutaS

22 2 mahpleF X gniKnaI attageRniyadnuSno3,taSecaR160766834210

92 2 notgnimyL X X knabllaWlegiN

tsuguA5 6 keeWkeenS sliatedrofetisbeWeeS-ecitcarPsdlroW

21 7 kilbmedeM PIHSNOIPMAHCDLROW

91

62 3 notgnildirB X X mahpalCydnaS spihsnoipmahCnrehtroN

rebmetpeS2

9 2 ragdEtroP X

61 2 notseW X X nosaMydnA

32

03

rebotcO7 2 aeSnohgieL senyaBeilrahC DEMRIFNOCEBOT

51 2 dnaltuR X X X s'DF&syerpsOhtiwerahS-sdnalnI

Contendering - July 2000 17sgnidnatStnerruC-0002srellevarTlanoitaNACB sgnidnatStnerruC-0002srellevarTlanoitaNACB sgnidnatStnerruC-0002srellevarTlanoitaNACB sgnidnatStnerruC-0002srellevarTlanoitaNACB sgnidnatStnerruC-0002srellevarTlanoitaNACB

oNliaS emaN effilchgiH tehctaD -thgirBaesgnil slanoitaN drofxO

seirtnEfooN 22 51 71 75 51

436 senoJtrautS 62 91 95 91

926 tteworBnhoJ 81 12 85

266 nettaBdrahciR 41 9 81 55

825 knabllaWlegiN 12 02 45

626 nedloHmiT 32 71 15

376 nwodgnaLyraG 51 8 25 41

646 etihWregoR 9 21 61 63 21

456 ttocSmaharG 42 06

955 yelpahSdranreB 22 51 34

616 seivaDevaD 71 31 84

985 luaPhtieK 52 94

476 relmmiGdrahciR 61 83 71

126 setaeKekiM 02 41 71 81

176 reklaWluaP 81 93 9

316 notruBynoT 91 44

956 flacteMnitraM 91 63 8

156 noslineRnaI 16

664REG ekciWG 75

166 rettoPydnA 65

966 notsAevaD 04 61

746 eisoRlieN 35

326 nosliWnaI 05

066 seviDreteP 74

474REG hcsubkcieKM 74

674 reituaGdivaD 31 11 12

226 renttuBdrahciR 54

356 llehctiMsirhC 23 31

995 seliMsirC 24

426 hcodruMtrawetS 14

206 notsAttaM 61 51 01

056 etihWynoT 11 92

256 mahpalCydnaS 01 41 51

575 egaPmaharG 73

136 nonnikcaMnivaG 43

155 dieR 33

666 llahsraMnaI 62 7

554 ecarGkciN 5 72

236 yawnoCnairdA 03

074REG llenabrabAT 92

895 enooTtaM 21 51

946 retsinnaBsirhC 8 81

065 eilliaBnaI 52

035 bbiBnaveK 42

095 nedloHneB 32

536 mahneDekiM 22

583 sgnippeSmoT 02

846 nlocniLegniG 6 41

075 llaHemoclaM 91

756 notooHlliB 31 6

77NAC nostaWnaI 71

191ASU yellooWlliG 61

775 nilhgualcaMhciR 7 7

026 yarByecatS 8 6

394 yeltseirPlihP 31

622deN naVneBtrevEneeV 21

006 eltteBffoeG 21

046 ttalloMnalA 11

655 nallAnairB 11

856 ewoHsirhC 11

154 drahciRsirhC 01

416 senoJnitraM 01

016 dlogdaerhTekiM 01

783 ttocS 9

276 dyoLLroverT 9

055 stnyoP 8

093 ttekcoMnodroG 7

494 nostreboRdivaD 7

063 riuMselrahC 6

766 htimS 6

866 llewkcoCnoR 6

781 kooCynoT 5

405 repooCdrahciR 5

585 smailliWydnA 5

sgnidnatStnerruC-0002srellevarTlanoitaNACB sgnidnatStnerruC-0002srellevarTlanoitaNACB sgnidnatStnerruC-0002srellevarTlanoitaNACB sgnidnatStnerruC-0002srellevarTlanoitaNACB sgnidnatStnerruC-0002srellevarTlanoitaNACB

oNliaS emaN effilchgiH tehctaD -thgirBaesgnil slanoitaN drofxO

seirtnEfooN 22 51 71 75 51

TTTTTravellers Travellers Travellers Travellers Travellers Trrrrrophy Scoringophy Scoringophy Scoringophy Scoringophy Scoring:::::

The travellers trophy is scored on a league basis. Each competitor scores 5 points for entering a designatedNational Travellers meeting, plus 1 point for each boat beaten. The winner is the sailor who scores the mostpoints. There is no minimum qualifying number of meetings.

In addition to the Travellers Competition there is also a Handicap Ranking, and this table is managed by StuartJones. The handicap ratings are generated from the open meeting results. A handicap score is calculated foreach event attended. This is the proportion of finishing position to number of entries expressed in terms of 1000entries: i.e. if 1000 boats compete, boats will have their finishing position as the score. If 10 compete the winnerwill be in the middle of the range 1-100 i.e. 50. Second place will be between 100-200 i.e. 150. 3rd will be 250,and so on up to 10th who will be 950. Therefore the better the result and the bigger the fleet then the lower thescore and the handicap attained for the event. The Ranking is the handicap result achieved after an open, andis not accurate for a helm until at least 3 results have been recorded. The ranking is calculated thus:- If the scorefor a result is less than the current rating i.e. they have performed better than their rank, then half the differencebetween current rank and the score is subtracted from the rank to give a new rank. If the score is worse than thecurrent rank i.e. performed worse than their rank, then one tenth of the difference between current rank andthe score is added to the rank to give a new rank. Therefore the rank goes up quicker than down.

Unfortunately we don’t have space in this issue to print the full rankings, but are you surprised that one StuartJones is currently top of the rankings?...

Contendering - July 200018

DISCOUNTFERRY TICKETS

UP TO 50% OFF NORMAL FARESBRITTANY FERRIES France • Spain • UK

HOVERSPEED Belgium • France • UKMOBY LINE & TIRRENIA LINE Italy

P&O FERRIES France • Spain • Holland • Ireland • UKP&O STENA LINE France • UK

SEA FRANCE France • UKSCANDINAVIAN SEAWAYS Denmark • Germany •

Scandinavia • UKSTENA LINE Holland • Ireland • Scandinavia • UK

SWANSEA CORK FERRIES Ireland • UKBOOK EARLY TO AVOID DISAPPOINTMENT

Contact Richard Buttner: Marne, Upper Rd, BroadleesGuston, Dover, CT16 1HP Tel/Fax 01304 216194

TOP FOILSTOP FOILSTOP FOILSTOP FOILSTOP FOILSMIKE SAULMIKE SAULMIKE SAULMIKE SAULMIKE SAUL

48 HOLLINS LANE, HAMPSTHWAITE, NRHARROGATE, N. YORKS HG3 2EG

TEL: 01423 771821

CUSTOM FOILS BUILT TO THEHIGHEST STANDARD

Professional Grip Foam Tiller Extensions • Wetsuits •Drysuits • Buoyancy Aids • Clothing

SECONDHAND ADS FREE TO ASSOCIATION MEMBERS - TO PLACE YOUR SECONDHAND BOAT OR GEAR ON THIS LIST, PLEASE CONTACT:

JERRY DRISCOLL - 01962 711698 • E-MAIL: contendering@driscoll.globalnet.co.uk

IF YOU BUY OR SELL A BOAT, OR ANY EQUIPMENT ON THE LIST, PLEASE TELL JERRY STRAIGHT AWAY SO THE LIST CAN BE KEPT UP TO DATE.

THE UP TO DATE LIST IS PUBLISHED ON THE CONTENDER WEB SITE http://www.sailingsource.com/contender/gbr/AND ALSO AVAILABLE FROM CLASS SECRETARY DAVE DAVIES ON 01531 632308

Sails for Sale: Wavelength, 1992 (2 Years use) £125, North,1990(2 Years use) £50, Smith £30Bradford. Stewart Walker: 01274 588484Goldspar mast, little used, dead straight £200. Wavelength sail,3 weeks use, £300, Milanes fixed rudder, used 3 times £190Weston SC. Ian Swann: 01243 776458GBR 240, Rondar, Proctor Rig, 2 sails, cover, trolly, harness,£525Andy Bass, 01280 706496, NorthantsGBR 292, Rondar, Storrar & Bax, Combi, £950John Kerridge, 01326 311719GBR 315, GRP, Good condition for age, Ullman Sail, Proctorspars, recent foils, Combi (rough), £850Jem Mills, 02380 395999, NetleyGBR 335, Rondar, 3 sails, combi trailer, £600Philip Razey, 01822 854661, PlymouthGBR 382, Titcombe Rondar, No Mast, Stored under car port,good condition, sail, U/O covers, home made combi trailer,£1,300Tony Titcombe, 01622 717260, KentGBR 432, Edwards, all wood, Proctor mast, selection of sailsavailable, trailer but trolley required, good cover, £1,500Richard Gimmler, 0115 9214771, NottinghamGBR 438, Sandwich, Perfect condition. Wavelength mast and sail(1998), Proctor mast, Banks sail (1987), Superspars boom,combi, U/O covers, Silva racing compass, carbon tiller extension,Milanes foils, FF22,000Henri Chemineau 0299819340 0603458391, or contact DaveDavies, 01531 632308, Boat laying at St Malo, Brittany, FranceGBR 439, Rondar, Etched Epsilon, Ullman sail, (Combiavailable), £1,500Colin Truscott, 01872 520586, Cornwall

GBR 451, 1987 Rondar, Wavelength rig, Wavelength sail 1996,mast / rigging 1998, carbon board + spare, progrip, all newcordage. Combi Trailer, new 1994, under / over covers, littleused, garaged 360 days / yr., £2,000Chris Richard, 01835 823470, South ScotlandGBR 508, Rondar, good racing condition, Wavelength rig, Combi,U/O covers, £1700Ian Maclean, 0151 648 2527, WirralGBR 519, Rondar, Wavelength Rig, 2 spare sails, U/O Cover,Combi, good condition, fast boat, £1,500Neil Beveridge, 01560 485385, ScotlandGBR 522, Rondar, very good condition, Wavelength & Proctormasts, Wavelength sail (hardly used) plus good spare sail.Combi trailer & trolley, U/O covers. Reluctant sale due to recentoperation. £1750Alastair Dean, 01763 272924 evenings, 01920 863835 day,GrafhamGBR 560, Rondar, grey deck / maroon hull. Wavelength rig, 3sails, new boom, Top Foils / Winder lifting rudder and fixedrudder, carbon extension, Milanes centreboard. Pro-grip, Harkenfittings. Combi trailer, U/C covers. Fast well kept boat in excellentcondition. £2,200Ian Baillie, 0131 449 6583, Edinburgh - Could deliverGBR 570, Rondar, Wavelength Rig, Wavelength sail, spare sail,U/O, Cover, Combi. £2,000Malcolm Hall, 0114 2362061, SheffieldGBR 579, Ridge/Daniel, Wavelength mast, 2 Ullman sails, Fixedrudder, covers, combi, revarnished, £2,600Maurice Clarke, 01269 595941, South WalesGBR 604, Composite Ridge hull, decked & foils by Top Foils,Wavelength rig, 2 sails (1 x Wavelength & 1 x Number One),Combi, U/O covers, £2650Hugh Wright, 07818 061199 (Wk), 01953 887789 (H), Norfolk

Boats & Gear for Sale...

Contendering - July 2000 19

Th

e C

on

ten

der

!BOB HOAREBOB HOARE�

SAILBOATSThe Bob Hoare Sailboats ContenderAll glass vinylester or polyester Contenders from the moulds developedby Ian Ridge and Graham Scott. Complete boats ready to sail from£6295.00 complete with Wavelength rig and Milanes foils

Contender KitsBare hulls and kits supplied to any stage for home completionHulls from £1175.00

Contender Spares

Proctor & Superspars booms • carbon and alloy tiller extensionsreplacement rigging • cascade kickers • covers • foils • compasses

• trailersFittings

A huge range from: Fredriksen • Harken • Holt Allen • Ronstan • RWO • Seasure.

RepairsTop quality repair and refit service in wood or glass.

Insurance work welcomeClothing

Wide range of top brands: Wetsuits • drysuits • buoyancy aids• boots • spraytops from

Musto • Crewsaver • Gill • Gul • Busta • Henri-Lloyd • Marlin • YAK

Bob Hoare Ltd248 Bournemouth Road, Parkstone, Poole, Dorset. BH14 9HZ

Telephone: 01202 736704 Fax: 01202 388704Mobile: 0802 689157

www.bobsboatshop.co.ukE-mail: paul@bobsboatshop.co.uk

All prices include 17.5% VAT

BOBS BOAT SHOP

Chandlery BoatbuildingSpecialist Dinghy Chandlery & Dinghy Builder

COMPOSITEVERSION 7th

UK NATIONALS& 3rd KIEL

WEEK

1ST CHOICE FOR CONTENDERS

The latest version of the sail that has won the last 6 WorldChampionships - £552.25

SAILS

Fits perfectly with the sail and manufactured in 7000 Series Alloy - Fully fitted,excluding rigging - £552.25

MASTS

RIGGING Made in our workshop using high quality stainless steel wire and fittings:-Complete set including halyard ............................................................................. £102.23Shroud/Trapeze set (Both sides) ............................................................................. £46.00Halyard (Wire/Rope) ............................................................................................. £23.50Forestay ................................................................................................................ £14.10Lower Shrouds (Pair) ............................................................................................. £21.15

Complete Rig Pack - Ideal for home completion boats or complete rig upgradeIncludes Sail, Mast, Full Spec Boom, All rigging and Adjusters, including Cascade Vang and Sta-masters for Lower shrouds. Everything above deck in one package at aSPECIAL PRICE............................................................................... £1295.00

RIG PACK

Top quality breathable polycotton Top Cover ......................................................... £155.10Heavy Duty PVC Top Cover ................................................................................... £115.00Nylon Undercover ................................................................................................ £105.00

COVERS

FOILS Milanes Centreboard - Special Spec ....................................................................... £375.00Milanes Fixed Rudder ........................................................................................... £299.00Milanes Lifting Blade ............................................................................................ £259.00Winder Kevlar Stock ............................................................................................. £125.00

ACCESSORIES Wavelength Nappy Harness (S,M,L,) ....................................................................... £75.00Wavelength Knee Pads ........................................................................................... £17.00Wavelength Large Trapeze Rings (Each) ................................................................... £5.75Progrip Non Slip - Sheet (Blue,Grey,Black,Red) ....................................................... £27.00Silva 103P Compass ............................................................................................. £116.33Sta-Master Rigging Screws (Each) ........................................................................... £21.15

All pricesinclude 17.5%

VATCarriage

Charged atCost

SPARES Superspars B1 Boom .............................................................................................. £90.00Superspars B1 Boom c/w Outhaul and Big Vang Slide ............................................. 132.00Cascade Wire Vang ................................................................................................. £34.08Slot Gaskets (Pair) ................................................................................................... £8.81Forestay Lever ....................................................................................................... £27.00Tiller Extension - Alloy ............................................................................................ £26.00Tiller Extension - Carbon ........................................................................................ £49.95Gooseneck Assembly ................................................................................................ 25.00Masthead Sheave Box .............................................................................................. 16.45Sail Track Lead-in ....................................................................................................... 3.95

WAVELENGTH DESIGNS • UNIT 5a • THE STAMPS INDUSTRIAL ESTATE • RISING SUN • CALLINGTON • CORNWALL • PL17 8JETEL/FAX: 01579 351628 • E-mail: gscott@wavelengthdesigns.com • WEB SITE http://www.wavelengthdesigns.com